Free Speech After Charlie Kirk: an American Lesson for Pam Bondi, Donald Trump & Netanyahu
By Ilana Mercer | LewRockwell.com | October 4, 2025
Let us be clear about what freedom of speech à la America truly means:
The words people speak, chant, write and tweet; the beliefs they are known to hold, the flags they fly or burn, the symbolic, non-violent ceremonies and rituals they enact, the insignia, paraphernalia; the goose-stepping, Hitler salutes they muck around with—provided no physical aggression is involved (violence against animals included), all this counts as protected speech, licit in natural law.
So long as oddities and idiosyncrasies, whether performed alone or in groups, thoughts harbored privately or shared in public—so long as no violence accompanies such speech or behavior; so long as your mitts stop at the next man’s face (or at the next mutt’s fury face, Kristi Noem): SPEECH. It’s all speech. It should be free, unfettered and as wild and as wanton as can be.
At their worst, expressions of ostensible antisemitism, Naziism, racisms or other antipathies amount to thought crimes, nothing more, if expressed as a belief system severally or collectively, rather than in palpably violent actions. Whether your thoughts are spoken, chanted, written or preached; be they impolite or impolitic: they are, at worst, no more than thought crimes.
Thought crimes are nobody’s business in a free society. Thought crimes ought to be ferociously protected by a free people. By logical extension, any accusations of antisemitism, Naziism or other antipathies and racisms, are especially suspect when emitted as a meme from American institutionalized power structures.
One such obscenely wealthy and worthless power structure is the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), or Defamation League—a more apt moniker once suggested by Elon Musk, before he joined the ADL in severely censoring some speech on the X platform. The ADL is a meddlesome shakedown operation, in the mold of the Southern Poverty Law Center (“Smear Artists for the Total State,” wrote Tom DiLorenzo). It has taken it upon itself to decide who lives and who dies socially and financially on the basis of the unfortunate individual’s ideas, spoken and written.
In the American tradition, thoughts and words spoken or written that are politically impolite—again, racism; Naziism, antisemitism—retain protected status as speech beyond the adjudication of law-makers, bureaucrats, mediacrats, educrats and technocrats.
Sniffing out racists or anti-Semites is an absolute no-no for any and all self-respecting, libertarian-minded Americans, or any American, for that matter. Like creedal libertarians, Americans don’t, or should not, prosecute thought crimes or persecute thought “criminals.”
Ours should be The Skokie Standard of free speech and thinking (which I articulated in August 2022). What is The Skokie Standard of free speech? In 1978, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) took a stand for free speech by defending a neo-Nazi group that wanted to march through the Chicago suburb of Skokie, where many Holocaust survivors lived. The Skokie Standard of free speech is one that champions unpopular expression, and vigorously defends all marginalized speakers and thinkers, rather than purveying and protecting state and corporate ideology du jour.
Let me repeat what the Skokie Standard of free speech stands for here: However which way they are grouped, the words people individually or collectively speak, chant, write and tweet; the beliefs they are known to hold, the flags they fly or stomp, the symbolic, non-violent ceremonies, rituals and protests they perform; the insignia, paraphernalia, the goose-stepping, Hitler salutes they dick around with—provided no physical aggression is involved, all that counts as protected speech.
Turning Point USA’s Charlie Kirk, RIP, got it. On May 2, 2024, Kirk wrote the following: “Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment. Keep America free.”
Trump’s Attorney General Pam Bondi doesn’t get it. No wonder even Glenn Greenwald, once a practicing constitutional attorney—and a man of manners and decorum—regularly appends “dumb” and “lacking any grasp of constitutional law” to any mention of Bondi, who said this after Kirk’s murder:
The Justice Department would “absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech… There’s free speech, and then there’s hate speech. And there is no place—especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie — [for that] in our society,” Bondi told a podcaster likewise cerebrally compromised.
If you thought the nation’s chief law enforcement officer had blurted out on an impulse such promises of unconstitutional hate-speech prosecutions; I’m sorry to say that Bondi only doubled down. In scant regard for the letter and spirit of American constitutional law, she advised employers, on September 15, of their “obligation to get rid of people who are saying horrible things.”
While “The First Amendment doesn’t stop private employers from choosing to fire people for speech; it can be illegal for the government to use its power to pressure a private company into firing a staff member.” In America, not even do celebrations of Kirk’s assassination count as threats of violence or incitement to violence. In fact, “government retribution for speech,” lambasted U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, “is directly forbidden by the First Amendment.”
For our libertarian purposes, moreover, speech should never be defended by deploying a contents-driven defense, such as that a book, an utterance or their author must be spared on account that the person is good and his words are not racist and are against bigotry.
The Argument from Freedom means arguing process, not content. Racism, (alleged) antisemitism or Naziism in targeted literature or in protests should always and everywhere be a peripheral issue. Or, preferably, no issue at all.
The Argument from Freedom means arguing not over the contents of publications like Mein Kampf or the merit of protests for Palestine, but for their publication and practice irrespective of their contents. Which is why I say freedom’s argument is an argument from process, not content.
Freedom makes the case for an unfettered free market in ideas, good and bad. Freedom argues for politically impolite books to be published and read freely. It demands that all offensive literature be available to the free men and women who inhabit the free society. And not because of history; so that we don’t forget it or repeat it. Rather, freedom needs no justification. It is an end unto itself. You are deficient in American solidarity if you don’t stand up for non-violent protest and all speech.
Liberty is a simple thing. It’s the unassailable right to shout, flail your arms, and verbally provoke people in power, unmolested. Tyranny is when those small things can get you assaulted, incarcerated, injured, deported, even killed.
Ultimately banning books or proscribing speech and speakers as the kangaroo courts of Britain, Europe and Canada do legally, assumes a lack of choice and agency among ostensibly “free” human beings. It’s also predicated on the acceptance of a higher authority which decides for the rest of us which cultural products are fit for our consumption.
I thus put it to you, dear reader, left and right, that speech restrictions stateside in the form of the Antisemitism Awareness Act mirror the worst of British and western Europe’s anti-speech tribunals. Tabled by a Republican and a Democrat, S. 4127, which mercifully is still in committee, would embed state agitprop throughout American education. For posterity. Aside being in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Antisemitism Awareness Act would utterly enervate discourse in our country and criminalize vast tracts of speech as well as proscribe actions that are licit in constitutional and natural law.
Left, Right and libertarian; we can and must, then, join in unapologetically rejecting the very idea of policing, purging, persecuting or prosecuting people for holding and expressing politically unpopular ideas in action or in speech.
Mexico Bill Proposes Prison for AI Memes Mocking Public Figures
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | October 6, 2025
Mexico’s Congress is once again at the center of a free speech storm.
This time, Deputy Armando Corona Arvizu from the ruling Morena party is proposing to make it a crime to create or share AI-generated memes or digital images that make fun of someone without their consent.
His initiative, filed in the Chamber of Deputies, sets out prison terms of three to six years and fines for anyone who “create, manipulate, transform, reproduce or disseminate images, videos, audios or digital representations” made with artificial intelligence for the purpose of “ridiculing, harassing, impersonating or damaging” a person’s “reputation or dignity.”
Read the bill here.
The punishment would increase by half if the person targeted is a public official, minor, or person with a disability, or if the content spreads widely online or causes personal, psychological, or professional harm.
The bill presents itself as protection against digital abuse but is, as always, a new attempt at censorship.
The initiative would insert Articles 211 Bis 8 and 211 Bis 9 into the Federal Penal Code, written in vague and sweeping terms that could cover almost any form of online expression.
It makes no distinction between a malicious deepfake and a harmless meme.
By criminalizing content intended to “ridicule,” the bill allows courts or public figures to decide what counts as ridicule. That opens the door to arbitrary enforcement.
There are no explicit protections for parody, satire, or public-interest criticism, all of which are essential to a free society.
Even more troubling, the law increases penalties when the alleged victim is a public servant.
That provision could turn the law into a tool for politicians to insulate themselves from criticism, since any joke, meme, or cartoon could be claimed to harm their “dignity.”
Mexico has long relied on humor as a form of political expression.
Memes, cartoons, and viral jokes often serve as the public’s way of questioning authority. Turning that humor into a potential crime would be a serious step backward.
Instead of making the internet safer, this measure could create a chilling effect that discourages users from speaking or joking freely for fear of prison time.
This is not the first time Morena has tried to police online humor. Former Puebla governor Alejandro Armenta introduced what became known as the Censorship Law, which sought to punish people for “insulting or offending” others online.
The watchdog group Article 19 warned that its broad language could easily be used against journalists or ordinary citizens.
Earlier this year, Ricardo Monreal suggested an Anti-Memes Law that would have required humorous posts to be labeled as “memes” to avoid penalties. Public outrage forced him to abandon the idea.
Corona’s proposal follows the same path under a new label. While it claims to address the dangers of AI manipulation, its vague wording threatens free expression instead of safeguarding it.
Al-Azhar University levelled in Gaza amid intensified Israeli strikes
MEMO | October 6, 2025
Israeli airstrikes on Sunday levelled Al-Azhar University in Gaza City as part of a wave of attacks across the besieged enclave, according to Palestinian sources. The strikes left several civilians injured and caused extensive damage to homes and infrastructure.
The Palestinian News Agency, citing local sources, reported that Israeli aircraft also targeted tents sheltering displaced people near Asdaa city, north of Khan Yunis, wounding multiple civilians.
Elsewhere, Israeli artillery shelled crowds waiting for humanitarian aid east of Wadi Gaza, while air raids pounded the Al-Sabra, Al-Jalaa, and Al-Thalathini neighbourhoods around Tayaran Junction, striking residential buildings and damaging nearby homes.
In central Gaza, Israeli aircraft hit the Maghazi refugee camp, leaving injuries and further destruction to civilian property.
The bombing of Al-Azhar University marked the most significant strike of the day, with the landmark institution reduced to rubble. It comes amid a broader campaign targeting Gaza’s infrastructure and civilian facilities.
Hamas official welcomes Arab-Islamic support for movement’s response to Trump plan
MEMO | October 6, 2025
Izzat al-Rishq, a member of Hamas’s Political Bureau, on Monday welcomed a joint statement issued by the foreign ministers of several Arab and Islamic countries, describing it as “important support” for efforts to end Israeli military operations in Gaza and advance negotiations toward a ceasefire.
Speaking to Quds Press, al-Rishq said the ministers’ declaration reinforced the Palestinian position in ongoing talks and could help secure a permanent ceasefire, the withdrawal of Israeli forces, and the entry of humanitarian aid, paving the way for reconstruction under a Palestinian administration backed by Arab and Islamic states.
“We look forward to further Arab and Islamic support to stop the aggression and genocide against our people in Gaza, to end the occupation, and to achieve the aspirations of our people for an independent state with Jerusalem as its capital,” he added.
In their joint statement, the foreign ministers of Jordan, the UAE, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Egypt welcomed Hamas’s steps in response to US President Donald Trump’s proposal. The plan calls for ending the war in Gaza, releasing detainees on both sides, and launching immediate negotiations on implementation mechanisms.
The ministers also praised Hamas’s announcement that it is ready to hand over the administration of Gaza to a transitional Palestinian committee of independent technocrats. They stressed the urgency of moving forward on all elements of the proposal to end the humanitarian and political crisis in the enclave.
Oracle execs: Love Israel or maybe this isn’t the job for you
Employees who disagreed were reportedly referred to company mental health services
By Eli Clifton | Responsible Statecraft | October 3, 2025
TikTok’s impending sale to a group of U.S. investors led by Oracle was supposed to alleviate concerns about foreign influence over the popular social media platform. But a series of statements in Israeli media outlets by company executives including Executive Vice Board Chair and former CEO Safra Catz, reveal the company’s commitment to Israel is “unequivocal” and is not shy about squelching criticism of Israel internally.
These statements raise questions about how Oracle might exercise its impending ownership role at TikTok, a platform popular with young adults who are often critical of U.S. support for Israel’s war in Gaza and Israel’s killing of Palestinian civilians, which a U.N. commission recently characterized as a “genocide.”
In 2021, Catz visited Israel as her first trip outside the U.S. after the COVID-19 pandemic. Calcalist, an Israeli publication, reported on remarks by the Oracle CEO:
When asked about the protests against Israel organized by employees at Google and Apple, Catz said that “when you connect with Oracle you understand that we are committed to the U.S. and Israel. We are not flexible regarding our mission, and our commitment to Israel is second to none. This is a free world and I love my employees, and if they don’t agree with our mission to support the State of Israel then maybe we aren’t the right company for them. Larry (Ellison, co-founder of Oracle) and I are publicly committed to Israel and devote personal time to the country and no one should be surprised by that.”
In a 2024 interview with Calcalist, Catz emphasized that one of her first actions after the October 7th 2023 Hamas attack was to send the message to Oracle’s clients around the world – including, presumably, in many countries where Oracle holds government contracts – that the technology company prioritizes Israel. She said:
“So what we did was first sort of hug our employees, hug my Oracle employees by doing everything we could think of and put on our website ‘We stand with Israel’, not only on our Israeli website or even on our American website, but on our websites around the world in the local language. And as you know, we operate in a lot of countries. And it was very important for us to make sure we made a powerful message about how important Israel is and what the difference is between good and evil.”
Head of Oracle Israel Eran Feigenbaum reinforced the messages delivered by Catz in a 2023 interview with the Israeli publication Ynet. Feigenbaum said:
“I couldn’t fathom a global company offering more support to Israel than Oracle. It’s an incredible opportunity to lead the Israeli branch with the backing of a global powerhouse. Oracle’s leadership, including the fact that Larry himself has an Israeli origin, has consistently demonstrated unequivocal support for Israel. So much so, that employees not aligning with support for Israel may find Oracle isn’t the right fit.”
The message from higher ups at Oracle that anything less than total prioritization of Israeli interests is unwelcome behavior appears to be reinforced through the company’s human resources department. An anonymous Substack, Oracle For Palestine, written by a group of Oracle employees, claims that “our leadership’s unquestioning public support for Israel” has led to a failure of the company to address the one-sided political positions taken by top management and the discrimination faced by employees who don’t share the political views of management.
“In response to legitimate concerns, many of us have been referred to internal mental health resources rather than having those concerns addressed appropriately,” said the group in a post last year.
Catz’s comments as well as the anecdote about Oracle staff being referred to mental health resources were all celebrated in a Times of Israel blog post by Oracle employee Ivan Bassov.
“Oracle has been refreshingly clear and consistent under the leadership of our CEO, Safra Catz,” wrote Bassov. “She has repeatedly articulated both her personal commitment and Oracle’s commitment to Israel.”
Bassov appeared to corroborate the anonymous Substack’s claims and endorsed Oracle’s treatment of his “anti-Israel” colleagues, writing, “Well, if sending these ‘activists’ to therapy instead of resetting the company’s moral compass counts as ‘repression,’ then maybe the company’s judgment was sounder than they think.”
Earlier this week, Responsible Statecraft reported on a leaked email from the hacked email account of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. “We have all been horrified by the growth of the BDS movement in college campuses and have concluded that we have to fight this battle before the kids even get to college,” said an email appearing to originate from Catz to Barak in 2015. “We believe that we have to embed the love and respect for Israel in the American culture.”
Sources familiar with the matter “could not confirm the authenticity of the email” and Oracle declined to comment about Catz’s statements. However, review of Catz’s public statements, as well as those from another executive at Oracle, reveal similar biases in favor of Israel and even clearer expressions of Oracle’s prioritization of Israel over any other countries or corporate interests.The track record of Oracle executives demanding commitment to Israel from staff around the world raises a number of questions:
How does Oracle address situations in which U.S. interests, or the interests of any other country in which the company operates, are in conflict with Israel’s interests?
Will these statements of unequivocal support for Israel translate into restrictions on speech critical of Israel on TikTok under Oracle’s ownership?
An Oracle spokesperson did not respond to these questions.
Eli Clifton is a senior advisor at the Quincy Institute and Investigative Journalist at Large at Responsible Statecraft. He reports on money in politics and U.S. foreign policy.
Trump, Hamas, and the future of Palestine
By Lorenzo Maria Pacini | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 6, 2025
The unprecedented statement
It is October 4, 2025: a few days before the second anniversary of the new war for the liberation of Palestine occupied by the Zionist entity Israel, the Hamas leadership has released a decisive statement regarding U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan for peace in the region.
Here is the full text:
In order to stop the aggression and war of extermination to which our steadfast people in the Gaza Strip are subjected, and in accordance with national responsibility, and to preserve the principles, rights, and supreme interests of our people, the Islamic Resistance Movement “Hamas” has conducted in-depth consultations with its leadership institutions, extensive consultations with Palestinian forces and factions, and consultations with mediators and fraternal friends, in order to arrive at a responsible position in dealing with the plan of U.S. President Donald Trump.
After thorough study, the movement has made its decision and delivered its response to the mediators as follows:
- The Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas appreciates the Arab, Islamic, and international efforts, as well as those of U.S. President Donald Trump, calling for an end to the war on Gaza, the exchange of prisoners, the immediate entry of aid, the rejection of occupation, and the rejection of the displacement of our Palestinian people.
- In this context, and in order to achieve a ceasefire and complete withdrawal from Gaza, the movement announces its approval for the release of all Israeli prisoners, dead or alive, according to the exchange formula included in President Trump’s proposal, provided that conditions on the ground allow for the exchange process.
- In this context, the movement confirms its readiness to immediately enter into negotiations through mediators to discuss the details.
- The movement also renews its approval of the handover of the administration of Gaza to a Palestinian body of independents (technocrats) based on Palestinian national consensus and with Arab and Islamic support.
- As for the other issues mentioned in President Trump’s proposal relating to the future of Gaza and the inherent rights of the Palestinian people, these are linked to an overall national position based on relevant international laws and decisions. They will be discussed within an overall Palestinian national framework, of which Hamas will be a part and to which it will contribute responsibly.
These words have shaken all those who support the struggle for the liberation of Palestine and the Axis of Resistance, but what exactly do they mean?
Behind the words
Hamas’ statement is very cleverly worded. At first glance, it may seem that the organization accepts Trump’s plan, but in essence this is not the case.
First, we must note that the wording of Hamas’ statement was chosen very carefully, with every word weighed. Thanking Trump, accepting the release of prisoners, even of bodies, accepting an independent technocratic government in Gaza, all seem at first glance to be a retreat on the part of Hamas; but if we look deeper, we see that all this is bound and conditioned by “conditions on the ground,” meaning that until Israel is ready to withdraw completely, there will in fact be no exchange.
Secondly, accepting the administration of Gaza by a technocratic government also seems like a retreat by Hamas, but if we pay attention, Hamas is talking about a collective Palestinian administration and, considering the predominantly Islamic and religious community in Gaza, a government of technocrats will not make sense and cannot really exist.
Third, Hamas has said it is ready and willing to accept the agreement, but issues relating to the future of Gaza, Palestinian rights, and the national framework must be examined at the national level, which means that even if Trump wanted to impose his totalitarian project, Hamas would oppose it as it would go against the terms of the agreement and jurisdiction, as these issues require general consensus.
Fourth, Hamas has not said it will leave, so its presence in Gaza’s political future is confirmed, and there is no mention of disarmament.
In fact, Hamas has very cleverly reformulated all its previous conditions on the negotiating table but, to use Trump’s own words, has returned the ball to Trump and left it in the American camp without giving any grounds for accusing Hamas of sabotaging the ceasefire, either in the media or in public opinion in Gaza.
Hamas responded to Trump’s plan with a response that is actually a conditional consent to put everything back in the blood-stained hands of the American Potus.
Looking at Trump’s plan
To better understand, let’s look at Trump’s plan. The national plan was to transfer the population of Gaza and transform the territory into a tourist area, a proposal clearly supported by the Zionist regime. However, in the new 20-point plan, Trump backtracked and accepted some decisive issues, such as those concerning the rights of the Palestinian population, reconstruction, the formation of a transitional government, a plan that even the American and Israeli media criticized as “difficult to sustain” even for Bibi Netanyahu.
The most important flaw in this plan, however, was that it completely ignored the key role of Hamas. Trump was trying to launch a “simulated peace” to save Netanyahu with the support of the collective West and even some compromised Arab countries, under strong public pressure, but the Sumud Flotilla incident exposed his plan and once again placed the regime at the center of global hatred. Therefore, Hamas’ response is also of great importance in terms of timing, as it demonstrates its political and media intelligence.
It should be reiterated that the statement issued by Hamas contains some key points:
- Accepting the ceasefire to demonstrate its opposition to war;
- Postponing the details to negotiations, thus leaving the final decision to Trump, which also means responsibility before the whole world;
- The absolute refusal to disarm;
- The future role in the Palestinian state.
An action that is perhaps the pinnacle of Hamas’ intelligence.
Hamas’ reaction explained by Hamas
Some senior Hamas leaders explained the response to the peace plan.
Musa Abu Marzouk explained the movement’s position on the proposed plan to end the Gaza war in an interview with Al Jazeera Qatar and outlined Hamas’ priorities in these negotiations, the first of which is to stop the massacre, stating: “Our priority is to stop the war and the massacre, and from this perspective, we have approached the plan in question with a positive attitude. We have examined the points of Trump’s plan directly related to the Hamas movement with a positive approach,“ adding that ”The implementation of the plan’s provisions requires details and understanding, and this plan cannot be implemented without negotiations. We will begin negotiations on all issues related to the movement and weapons.”
Describing part of the proposed plan as unrealistic, Abu Marzouk said, “The issue of handing over prisoners and bodies within 72 hours is theoretical and unrealistic in the current circumstances. The United States of America should look optimistically to the future of the Palestinian people.” Regarding the national agreement for the administration of Gaza, he said, “We have reached a national agreement on handing over the administration of Gaza to independent individuals (technocrats), and the authority for this administration will be the Palestinian National Authority. Outlining the future of the Palestinian people is a national issue that Hamas cannot decide on its own. We have agreed to the regional and international plan presented by Egypt, which includes answers regarding peace and the future.“
Marzouk also strongly reiterated that Hamas is a national liberation movement and that the definition of ”terrorism” contained in this plan cannot be applied to this movement under any circumstances: “We have agreed in principle and in general with the main points of the plan, but its implementation requires negotiations.”
This also has to do with the future of the weapons of resistance. The Hamas official specified that “We will hand over the weapons to the future Palestinian government, and whoever governs Gaza will have the weapons in their hands.” This line is consistent with what the Movement has always maintained.
Osama Hamdan, another senior official, told Al Arabi Channel that the Hamas movement is ready to immediately begin talks on the prisoner exchange operation, stressing that Hamas will not accept under any circumstances that a party outside Palestine take over the management of the Gaza Strip. The official also noted that the situation and facts on the ground regarding Israeli prisoners (both living and dead) must be taken into account in future negotiations. Hamdan added that the prisoner exchange process will take more than 72 hours and that this issue can only be resolved by reaching an agreement between the parties, reiterating that the entry of any foreign administration or force into Gaza is unacceptable under any circumstances.
Taher al-Nunu, media advisor to the head of Hamas’ political office, emphasized the movement’s full readiness to start immediate negotiations: “We are ready for immediate negotiations on prisoner exchange, ceasefire, and Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.”
These statements were made in the hours immediately following the official announcement.
This has nothing to do with “taking a step back” or, worse still, abandonment: we are witnessing a strategic move that forces the Zionist regime and the corrupt West to show their cards by making the first move.
Game. Set.
UK Preparing False-Flag Attack in Europe to Blame Russia for ‘Terrorist Plot’ – Russian Intel
Sputnik – 06.10.2025
London is enraged that the UK’s long-standing efforts to achieve a “strategic defeat” of Russia are failing and is preparing a new provocation, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) said on Monday.
“The Press Bureau of the Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation reports that, according to information received by the SVR, London is furious that long-standing British efforts to achieve the ‘strategic defeat’ of Russia and turn it into a pariah state are failing. [UK Prime Minister Keir] Starmer’s cabinet and its intelligence agencies are preparing to respond to Russia’s successes in the Ukrainian theater of military operations with yet another vile provocation,” the SVR said in a statement.
London’s plan suggests that a group of Russians fighting on the side of the Ukrainian armed forces is to carry out an attack on a Ukrainian navy ship or a foreign civilian vessel in a European port, the SVR also said, adding that members of the group have already arrived in the UK for training.
“After the terrorists are ‘discovered,’ it is planned to be announced that they were acting on ‘Moscow’s orders.’ London is counting on the fact that the Russophobic European political elite will happily swallow the fake news about ‘malicious Kremlin agents’ to justify the need to further increase military aid to Ukraine and the militarization of ‘united Europe’ to combat ‘Russian aggression,'” the statement read.
The UK plans to supply the group with Chinese-made underwater equipment and present it as a “proof” of Beijing’s support for special military operation, the SVR added.
West’s drone accusations baseless – Kremlin
RT | October 6, 2025
Western European officials should “broaden their horizons” when it comes to drone sightings and stop blaming Russia for everything, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Monday.
His comments come as several European countries have reported a string of UAV sightings near airports, military facilities and other critical infrastructure over the past month. Western officials have claimed, without evidence, that the drones belong to Moscow.
However, Peskov has stressed that there are “absolutely no grounds to blame Russia for this,” pointing to a recent report of a local “aviation enthusiast” with “no connection to Russia” being arrested in a European city while testing his drone.
“This is one specific, small, isolated example, but perhaps Europeans need to broaden their horizons,” Peskov said.
The spokesman did not specify which specific incident he was referring to. Bild reported on Saturday that a 41-year-old Croatian citizen was detained near Frankfurt am Main Airport for launching a drone.
Last week, the outlet also reported that several German citizens were detained for launching drones near an airport in Norway. A Chinese national was also said to have been deported by Norwegian authorities for flying a UAV near Svolvaer Airport in the north of the country.
“The story with these drones is strange, to say the least, but there’s no point in blaming Russia,” Peskov said. “There are many politicians in Europe who are now inclined to blame Russia for everything without any basis, without any grounds,” he added.
Moscow has consistently rejected any connection to the drone incidents at European airports. Officials have described the accusations as Western fearmongering used to whip up anti-Russian hysteria and justify inflated military budgets and escalate tensions.
Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has warned that Kiev could attempt to stage drone provocations as false-flag operations designed to blame Moscow and draw NATO into the ongoing Ukraine conflict.
French PM resigns hours after proposing new cabinet
RT | October 6, 2025
French Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu has announced his resignation less than 12 hours after appointing a new cabinet. The French parliament is deeply divided over efforts to pass a new budget that would tackle rising debt.
A former defense minister, Lecornu was the seventh prime minister appointed by French President Emmanuel Macron and the fifth in two years. His sudden resignation less than a month after entering the role makes him the shortest-lived prime minister in modern French history.
A long-time Macron loyalist, Lecornu faced fierce criticism from both sides of the political aisle on Sunday after unveiling his new cabinet which was largely unchanged from the previous government of Francois Bayrou. Parties across the National Assembly threatened to vote it down.
Following the announcement, several political parties have called for snap parliamentary elections. The National Rally party stated on X that “Macronism is dead on its feet,” and called on Macron to choose between the dissolution of the National Assembly or resignation.
Jean-Luc Melenchon, the leader of the left-wing La France Insoumise (LFI) party, has also called to introduce a motion to remove Macron from office.
Shortly after the news of Lecornu’s resignation broke, the Paris stock market dropped 12%, making it the worst-performing index in Europe. The euro has also seen a drop of 0.7% on the back of political instability.
France’s public finances have been under mounting strain, with the deficit reaching 5.8% of GDP in 2024 and public debt climbing to 113%, far above the 60% ceiling set by EU rules. The government has been seeking to push through an austerity budget aimed at curbing spending and stabilizing the debt ratio, but divisions in the National Assembly have made agreement difficult.
The political deadlock stems from last year’s snap parliamentary elections, which left France without a clear majority. The lower house is now split between three blocs — Macron’s centrist alliance, the left-wing New Popular Front, and the National Rally — none of which can govern alone. As a result, Macron’s governments have repeatedly struggled to secure votes on key legislation.
